My name is Refule Chulu and I'm a master human rights student at FAU.

Today I will present a summary of research on potential human rights

hoarders under the African human rights system.

The Banjul Charter reflects the African philosophy of human rights which is centered around the role

of the individual within a community as well as the equality of peoples. It explicitly protects

collective or group rights of peoples as such as well as those of more specific communities,

for example indigenous people. Unlike the human rights instruments developed by the United Nations

and other regional systems, the African Charter expressly recognizes and protects collective

rights. It uses the term peoples in its provisions including the preamble. Right from the beginning,

the instrument was meant to protect collective rights. The governing principle guiding the

preliminary draft was that the African Charter must reflect the African conception of human

rights, reflecting the African philosophy of law and meeting the needs of Africa. The principle

of people's equality was asserted. It is opposed to every attempt by one people to dominate another,

no matter the importance attached to it. The African human rights system will continue

protecting collective rights. The African Commission makes a distinction between people

as an entire people of a country as a collective, specific group of population within a state

considering themselves as distinct and indigenous people. The term indigenous is also not intended

to create a special class of citizens, but rather to address the historical present-day injustices

and inequalities. In the context of the African Charter, the working group notes that the notion

of peoples is closely related to collective rights. Now we look at case law that deals with the people

as human rights holders. In Malawi African Association and Others vs Mauritania, the

Commission did not find a violation of their right to equality, but found violations of Articles 2,

12 subsection 1, 14, 16 and 17 of the African Charter. It identified Black Mauritanians as a

specific group of the population within a state whose rights could potentially have been violated.

At the heart of the abuses alleged in the different communications is the question of

the domination of one section of the population by another. The resultant discrimination against

Black Mauritanians is the result of a negation of the fundamental principle of the equality

of peoples as stipulated in the African Charter and constitutes a violation of its Article 19.

The Commission must however admit that the information made available to it did not allow

it to establish with certainty that there was a violation of Article 19 of the Charter along

the lines alleged here. It was nevertheless identified and condemned the existence of

discriminatory practices against certain sectors of the Mauritanian population.

In Legal Resources Foundation vs Zambia, the complainant alleged that the Zambian

government had enacted into law a constitution which was discriminatory, divisive and violated

the human rights of 35% of the entire population. The Commission held that the right to non-discrimination,

which is Article 2, was violated, but recourse to the right of equality, Article 19, was mistaken,

providing a positive definition of peoples in this context. The Charter makes it clear that

citizens should have the right to participate in the government of their country directly or

through freely chosen representatives. The pain in such an instance is caused not just to citizens

who suffer discrimination by reason of place of origin, but that the rights to the citizens of

Zambia to freely choose political representatives of their choice is violated.

In Centre for Minority Rights Development Kenya and Minority Group Rights International on behalf

of Andorra's Welfare Council vs Kenya, the Commission recognized the Indigenous peoples'

rights over traditionally owned land and their right to development under the African Charter.

It named criteria for the definition of Indigenous peoples. It is clear that all attempts to define

the concept of Indigenous peoples recognize the linkages between peoples, their land and culture

and that such a group expresses its desire to be identified as a people or have the consciousness

that they are people. Now we look at companies as authors of communications. Legal persons can

submit communications to the Commission pursuant Rule 93 Caesar of the Communication. The African

Commission has adopted an actio popularis approach where the author of a communication did not know